{"id":49108,"date":"2006-01-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-01-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006"},"modified":"2018-06-04T09:14:02","modified_gmt":"2018-06-04T03:44:02","slug":"power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006","title":{"rendered":"Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission<\/div>\n
Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006<\/div>\n
Bench: B Bhushan, A Jung<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
1. The petition has been filed for approval for transmission charges for 220 kV  D\/C Jallandhar-Hamirpur transmission line with associated bays in Northern Region  (the transmission line) for the period from 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009, based on the Central  Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2004,  (hereinafter referred to as “the 2004 regulations”). The petitioner has also prayed that  it be permitted to continue the billing of transmission charges on the same basis as  charged on 31.3.2004, pending determination of tariff in the present petition and that  the reimbursement of expenditure from the beneficiaries towards publishing of notices  in newspapers and petition filing fee be approved.\n<\/p>\n
2. The revised cost of the transmission line was approved by the Central  Government vide Ministry of Power letter dated 13.12.2001 for Rs. 4308.00 lakh,  including IDC of Rs. 414.00 lakh. The date of commercial operation of the  transmission line with line length of 248 ckt-kms (for O&M) is 1.9.2001.\n<\/p>\n
3. The annual transmission charges for the period from 1.9.2001 to 31.3.2004  were decided by the Commission in its order dated 21.2.2005 in petition No. 10\/2002  at a gross block of Rs. 4117.70 lakh.\n<\/p>\n
4. The petitioner has claimed the transmission charges as under:\n<\/p>\n
                              (Rs. in lakh)
\n                       2004-05      2005-06     2006-07     2007-08     2008-09
\nDepreciation           123.43        123.43     123.43      123.43      123.43
\nInterest on Loan       219.41        201.16     181.55      159.85      139.51
\nReturn on Equity        63.20         63.20      63.20       63.20       63.20
\nAdvance against
\nDepreciation
\n                         0.00          0.00      51.35      169.49      132.87
\nInterest on Working
\nCapital
\n                        16.68         16.86      17.93       20.14       19.73
\nO & M Expenses         168.78        175.53     182.69      189.76      197.57
\nTotal                  591.50        580.18     620.15      725.87      676.31 <\/p>\n
5. The details submitted by the petitioner in support of its claim for interest on  working capital are given hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
                                                     (Rs. in lakh)
\n                        2004-05     2005-06     2006-07     2007-08     2008-09
\nMaintenance Spares       50.12       53.13       56.31       59.69       63.27
\nO & M expenses           14.07       14.63       15.22       15.81       16.46
\nReceivables              98.58       96.70      103.36      120.98      112.72
\nTotal                   162.77      164.45      174.89      196.48      192.45
\nRate of Interest         10.25%      10.25%      10.25%      10.25%      10.25%
\nInterest                 16.68       16.86       17.93       20.14        19.73 <\/p>\n
6. The replies to the petition have been filed by Pinjab State Electricity Board,  Rajasthan Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd, Ajmer Vidyut  Vitran Nigam Ltd and Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. No comments or suggestion  have been received from the general public in response to the notices published by  the petitioner under Section 64 of the Electricity Act, 2003.  IA No.29\/2005 – Additional Capitalisation – 2001-04 <\/p>\n
7. The petitioner has sought approval of tariff after accounting for additional  capital expenditure of Rs. 176.04 lakh incurred during 2002-03 and Rs 29.39 lakh  during 2003-04 (total Rs 205.43 lakh) on account of left over\/balance payments for the  transmission line\/sub-stations.  8. The expenditure was not considered by the Commission in its order dated  21.2.2005 ibid while approving tariff for the period ending 31.3.2004. The capital  expenditure claimed is found to be in order as it was against the committed liability.  Accordingly, the additional capital expenditure of Rs. 205.43 lakh is in order. It is,  however, noted that additional capitalisation of Rs 205.43 lakh when allowed over the  gross block of Rs 4117.70 lakh considered in the order dated 21.2.2005 ibid exceeds  the approved cost of Rs 4308.00 lakh. Therefore, the additional capitalisation is  restricted to a total of Rs 190.30 lakh to limit the gross block as on 1.4.2004 to the  approved capital cost of Rs 4308.00 lakh (excluding FERV). Accordingly, additional  capitalisation of Rs 176.04 lakh for the year 2002-03 has been allowed in toto, but the  for the year 2003-04, additional capitalisation of Rs. 14.26 lakh has been considered  against the petitioner’s claim for Rs 29.39 lakh.\n<\/p>\n
CAPITAL COST <\/p>\n
9. As per Clause (2) of Regulation 52 of the 2004 regulations in case of the  projects existing up to 31.3.2004, the project cost admitted by the Commission for  determination of tariff prior to 1.4.2004 shall form the basis for determination of tariff.\n<\/p>\n
10. The petitioner has considered the capital expenditure of Rs. 4467.31 lakh after  accounting for additional capitalization of Rs. 205.43 lakh on works and Rs. 144.18  lakh on account of FERV of for the period 1.9.2001 to 31.3.2004 over the capital  expenditure of Rs. 4117.70 lakh admitted by the Commission in the order dated  21.2.2005 ibid. However, for the reason given in para 8 above, gross block of Rs.  4308.00 lakh excluding FERV has been considered by us for the purpose of tariff.  Extra Rupee Liability during the years 2001-04:\n<\/p>\n
11. Regulation 1.13 (a) of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms  and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2001 provided as under:\n<\/p>\n
(a) Extra rupee liability towards interest payment and loan repayment  actually incurred, in the relevant year shall be admissible; provided it  directly arises out of foreign exchange rate variation and is not  attributable to Utility or its suppliers or contractors. Every utility shall  follow the method as per the Accounting Standard-11 (Eleven) as issued  by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India to calculate the impact  of exchange rate variation on loan repayment <\/p>\n
(b) Any foreign exchange rate variation to the extent of the dividend paid out  on the permissible equity contributed in foreign currency, subject to the  ceiling of permissible return shall be admissible. This as and when paid,  may be spread over the twelve-month period in arrears <\/p>\n
12. Regulation 1.7 of the 2001 further provided that recovery of foreign exchange  rate variation would be done directly by the utilities from the beneficiaries without filing  a petition before the Commission. In case of any objections by the beneficiaries to the  amounts claimed on these counts, they may file an appropriate petition before the  Commission.\n<\/p>\n
13. As no objections are raised by the beneficiaries to the petitioner’s claim for  capitalization of Rs.144.18 lakh on account of FERV, and FERV worked out is  matching with calculations submitted by the petitioner, the claim has been admitted for  tariff calculations.\n<\/p>\n
14. Based on the above, after adjustment of FERV of Rs 144.18 lakh, the gross  block as on 1.4.2004 comes to Rs.4452.18 lakh.\n<\/p>\n
DEBT- EQUITY RATIO <\/p>\n
15. Regulation 54 of the 2004 regulations inter alia provides that,-\n<\/p>\n
(1) In case of the existing project, debt-equity ratio Considered by the  Commission for fixation of tariff for the period ending 31.3.2004 shall be  considered for determination of tariff.\n<\/p>\n
(2) In case of the transmission system for which investment approval was  accorded prior to 1.4.2004 and which is likely to be declared under commercial  operation during the period 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009, debt-equity in the ratio of  70:30 shall be considered:\n<\/p>\n
 Provided that where deployment of equity is less than 30%, the actual equity  deployed shall be considered for the purpose of determination of tariff.  Provided further that the Commission may in appropriate case consider equity  higher than 30% for the purpose of determination of tariff, where the  transmission licensee is able to establish to the satisfaction of the Commission  that deployment of equity more than 30% was in the interest of general public;\n<\/p>\n
(3) In case of the transmission system for which investment approval is  accorded on or after 1.4.2004, debt-equity in the ratio of 70:30 shall be  considered for the purpose of determination of tariff:  Provided that where deployment of equity is less than 30%, the actual equity  deployed shall be considered for the purpose of determination of tariff.  (4) The debt and equity amount arrived at in accordance with above subclause  (1), (2) or (3), as the case may be, shall be used for calculation of  interest on loan, return on equity, advance against depreciation and foreign  exchange rate variation.\n<\/p>\n
16. The petitioner has claimed tariff based on debt-equity ratio of 94.23:5.77 as  considered by the Commission in its order dated 21.2.2005 ibid. The entire amount of  Rs 205.43 on account of additional capitalisation during 2002-03 and 2003-04 has  been taken as equity and the capitalised amount of Rs 144.18 lakh on account of  FERV has been apportioned between debt and equity in the same ratio as considered  in the order dated 21.2.2005. Based on this, Rs. 451.46 lakh as on 1.4.2004 has been  taken as the equity by the petitioner for the purpose of determination of tariff in the  present petition.\n<\/p>\n
17. The petitioner has stated in the petition that the approved debt-equity ratio is  82.85:17.15. Therefore, in order to bring debt and equity as close to the approved  debt-equity ratio as possible, the amounts of Rs. 190.30 lakh and Rs. 144.18 lakh  (total Rs 334.48 lakh) capitalized on account of works and FERV respectively have  been added to equity.. Accordingly, for the purpose of tariff, an amount of Rs. 572.19  lakh has been considered as equity as on 1.4.2004 against the equity of Rs. 237.71  lakh considered in the order dated 21.2.2005.\n<\/p>\n
RETURN ON EQUITY <\/p>\n
18. As per Clause (iii) of Regulation 56 of the 2004 regulations, return on equity  shall be computed on the equity base determined in accordance with regulation 54 @  14% per annum. Equity invested in foreign currency is to be allowed a return in the  same currency and the payment on this account is made in Indian Rupees based on  the exchange rate prevailing on the due date of billing.\n<\/p>\n
19. The petitioner has claimed return on equity of Rs. 451.46 lakh after accounting  for equity of Rs. 205.43 lakh on account of additional capitalization on works for the  period 1.9.2001 to 31.3.2004 and Rs. 8.32 lakh on account of FERV over equity of Rs.  237.71 lakh considered in the order dated 21.2.2005 ibid. For the reasons given  hereinabove, we have taken equity of Rs. 572.19 lakh. Accordingly, the petitioner  shall be entitled to return on equity @ Rs. 80.11 lakh each year during the tariff period.\n<\/p>\n
INTEREST ON LOAN <\/p>\n
20. Clause (i) of Regulation 56 of the 2004 regulations inter alia provides that,-\n<\/p>\n
(a) Interest on loan capital shall be computed loan wise on the loans arrived  at in the manner indicated in Regulation 54.\n<\/p>\n
(b) The loan outstanding as on 1.4.2004 shall be worked out as the gross  loan as per Regulation 54 minus cumulative repayment as admitted by the  Commission for the period up to 31.3.2004. The repayment for the period 200409  shall be worked out accordingly on normative basis.\n<\/p>\n
(c) The transmission licensee shall make every effort to swap the loan as  long as it results in net benefit to the long-term transmission customers. The  costs associated with such swapping shall be borne by the long-term  transmission customers.\n<\/p>\n
(d) The changes to the loan terms and conditions shall be reflected from the  date of such swapping and benefits passed on to the beneficiaries.\n<\/p>\n
(e) In case any moratorium period is availed of by the transmission licensee,  depreciation provided for in the tariff during the years of moratorium shall be  treated as repayment during those years and interest on loan capital shall be  calculated accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
21. The partitioner has claimed interest on loan in the following manner:\n<\/p>\n
(i) Gross loans, cumulative loan repayment up to 31.3.2004 and  outstanding balance up to that year as admitted by the Commission in  the order dated 21.2.2005 have been taken.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) On the basis of actual rate of interest on actual average loan, the  weighted average rate of interest on loan is worked out for various  years.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Loans as admitted by the Commission in the order dated 21.2.2005 ibid  has been considered as notional loan and the weighted average rate of  interest on loan for respective years as per above has been has been  multiplied to arrive at interest on loan.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) Notional loan component of FERV up to 31.3.2001 has been considered  separately and actual applicable rate of interest on foreign loan have  been considered to workout the interest on this component  22. In our calculation, the interest on loan has been worked out as detailed below:\n<\/p>\n
(i) Details of net outstanding loan as on 31.3.2004, repayment schedule for  the period 2004-09, rate of interest as on 1.4.2004, exchange rate as on  31.3.2004 etc. have been taken from above loan allocation statement for  working out weighted average rate of interest.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Gross loan and cumulative repayment up to 31.3.2004 has been taken  from the order dated 21.2.2005.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Moratorium in repayment of loan is considered with reference to  normative loan and if the normative repayment of loan during the year is  less than the depreciation during the year, it is considered as  moratorium and depreciation during the year is deemed as normative  repayment of loan during the year.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) Weighted average rate of interest on actual loan worked out as per (i)  above is applied on the average loan during the year to arrive at the  interest on loan.\n<\/p>\n
(v) Corporation Bank, PNB, PNB-II, OBC, and Bank of India Cayman Island  loans carry floating rate of interest and rate of interest as applicable as  on 1.4.2004 has been considered in the calculation, subject to mutual  settlement between the parties in case of any change\/resetting of the  interest rate during the tariff period:.\n<\/p>\n
23. Based on the above, the year-wise details of interest worked out are given  hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
                                             (Rs. in lakh)
\nDetails of loan Up to          2004-05     2005-06     2006-07     2007-08    2008-09
\n31.3.2004
\nInterest on Loan
\nGross loan as per order dated
\n21.2.2005
\n3879.99
\nAddition due to additional
\ncapitalisation
\n0.00
\nAddition due to FERV 0.00
\nGross Normative Loan           3879.99     3879.99      3879.99    3879.99     3879.99
\n3879.99
\nCumulative Repayment up to
\nPrevious Year
\n                                145.92     304.66        468.38     847.54      1442.05
\nNet Loan-Opening               3734.07    3575.33       3411.61    3032.45      2437.94
\nRepayment during the year       158.74     163.72        379.16     594.52       559.28
\nNet Loan-Closing               3575.33    3411.61       3032.45    2437.94      1878.66
\nAverage Loan                   3654.70    3493.47       3222.03    2735.19      2158.30
\nWeighted Average Rate of
\nInterest on Loan
\n                                5.7880%   5.4929%        5.2764%   5.1638%       5.1478%
\nInterest                        211.53    191.89         170.01    141.24        111.11 <\/p>\n
DEPRECIATION<\/p>\n
24. Sub-clause (a) of Clause (ii) of Regulation 56 of the 2004 regulations provides  for computation of depreciation in the following manner, namely:\n<\/p>\n
(i) The value base for the purpose of depreciation shall be the historical  cost of the asset.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Depreciation shall be calculated annually based on straight line method  over the useful life of the asset and at the rates prescribed in Appendix II  to these regulations. The residual value of the asset shall be considered  as 10% and depreciation shall be allowed up to maximum of 90% of the  historical capital cost of the asset. Land is not a depreciable asset and  its cost shall be excluded from the capital cost while computing 90% of  the historical cost of the asset. The historical capital cost of the asset  shall include additional capitalisation on account of Foreign Exchange  Rate Variation up to 31.3.2004 already allowed by the Central  Government\/Commission.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) On repayment of entire loan, the remaining depreciable value shall be  spread over the balance useful life of the asset.  (iv) Depreciation shall be chargeable from the first year of operation. In case  of operation of the asset for part of the year, depreciation shall be  charged on pro rata basis.\n<\/p>\n
25. The gross depreciable value of the asset, as per (ii) above, is 0.9 x Rs. 4452.18  lakh = Rs. 4006.96 lakh. Cumulative depreciation and AAD recovered in tariff up to  31.3.2004 is Rs. 324.15 lakh. Remaining depreciable value as on 1.4.2004 is thus  Rs.3682.81 lakh.\n<\/p>\n
26. For the period 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009 the depreciation works out to Rs. 123.03  lakh each year by applying rate of depreciation of 2.7634% as shown below:\n<\/p>\n
                                                         (Rs. in lakh)
\nDetails of                 2004-05     2005-06     2006-07     2007-08     2008-09
\nDepreciation
\nUp to
\n31.3.2004
\nAs per order dated
\n21.2.2005
\n4117.70 4117.70
\nAddition during 200104
\ndue to Additional
\nCapitalisation
\n190.30 190.30
\nAddition during 200104
\ndue to FERV
\n144.18 144.18
\nGross Block as on
\n31.3.2004                   4452.18     4452.18     4452.18     4452.18       4452.18
\n4452.18 4452.18
\nRate of Depreciation 2.7634%
\nDepreciable Value           4006.96     4006.96     4006.96     4006.96       4006.96
\n4006.96
\nBalance Useful life of
\nthe asset
\nRemaining  Depreciable Value 3682.81     3559.78     3436.75    3159.42        2771.43
\n3682.81
\nDepreciation                  123.03      123.03      123.03     123.03         123.03
\n123.03 <\/p>\n
ADVANCE AGAINST DEPRECIATION <\/p>\n
27. As per Sub-clause (b) of Clause (ii) of Regulation 56 of the 2004 regulations, in  addition to allowable depreciation, the transmission licensee is entitled to Advance  Against Depreciation, computed in the manner given hereunder:  AAD = Loan repayment amount as per Regulation 56 (i) subject to a ceiling of  1\/10th of loan amount as per Regulation 54 minus depreciation as per schedule <\/p>\n
28. It is provided that Advance Against Depreciation shall be permitted only if the  cumulative repayment up to a particular year exceeds the cumulative depreciation up  to that year. It is further provided that Advance Against Depreciation in a year shall  be restricted to the extent of difference between cumulative repayment and cumulative  depreciation up to that year.\n<\/p>\n
29. The petitioner has claimed Advance Against Depreciation in the following  manner:\n<\/p>\n
(i) 1\/10th of gross loan is worked out from the gross notional loan admitted  by the Commission order dated 21.2.2005.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Cumulative loan as well as repayment of notional loan during the year  have been considered.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Depreciation as claimed in the petition.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) In cumulative depreciation, Advance Against Depreciation allowed up to  2003-04 as per order dated 21.2.2005 ibid has not been considered.\n<\/p>\n
30. In our calculation, the Advance Against Depreciation has been worked as  under:\n<\/p>\n
(i) 1\/10th of gross loan has been worked out from the gross notional loan  as per para 23 above.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Cumulative loan as well as repayment of notional loan during the year  has been considered as per para 23 above.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Depreciation as worked out as per para 26 has been taken into account.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) In cumulative depreciation recovered up to 2003-04, Advance Against  Depreciation has been included as per order dated 21.2.2005 ibid.\n<\/p>\n
31. The details of Advance Against Depreciation allowed for the transmission line,  is given hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
                                                  (Rs. in lakh)
\n                          2004-05     2005-06     2006-07     2007-08     2008-09
\n1\/10th of Gross Loan(s)    388.00      388.00      388.00      388.00      388.00
\nRepayment of Loan          158.74      163.72      379.16      594.52      559.28
\nMinimum of the above       158.74      163.72      379.16      388.00      388.00
\nDepreciation during
\nthe year                   123.03      123.03      123.03      123.03      123.03
\n(A) Difference              35.71       40.69      256.12      264.97      264.97
\nCumulative Repayment of the
\nLoan                       304.66      468.38      847.54     1442.05     2001.33
\nCumulative Depreciation\/
\nAdvance against
\nDepreciation               447.18      570.21      693.25      970.57     1358.57
\n(B) Difference (-)         142.52 (-)  101.83      154.29      471.48      642.76
\nAdvance Against
\nDepreciation Minimum of (A)
\nand (B)
\n                             0.00        0.00      154.29      264.97      264.97 <\/p>\n
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES <\/p>\n
32. In accordance with Clause (iv) of Regulation 56 the 2004 regulations, the  following norms are prescribed for O & M expenses  Year
\n                                        2004-05   2005-06   2006-07   2007-08   2008-09
\nO&M expenses (Rs. in lakh per cktkm)    0.227     0.236     0.246     0.255     0.266
\nO&M expenses (Rs in lakh per bay)      28.12     29.25     30.42     31.63     32.90 <\/p>\n
33. The petitioner has claimed O & M expenses for 248 ckt-kms of line length and  4 bays (two each at Jallandhar and Hamirpur sub-stations), which has been allowed.  Accordingly, the petitioner’s entitlement to O & M expenses has been worked out as  given hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
                                                             (Rs. in lakh)
\n                                               Year
\n                                  2004-05     2005-06     2006-07    2007-08     2008-09
\nO&M expenses for 248 ckt-kms line
\nlength
\n                                   56.30       58.53       61.01      63.24       65.97
\nO&M expenses for 4 bays           112.48      117.00      121.68     126.52      131.60
\nTotal                             168.78      175.53      182.69     189.76      197.57 <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
34. The petitioner has submitted that the wage revision of its employees is due with  effect from 1.1.2007. Therefore, O &M expenses should be subject to revision on  account of revision of employee cost from that date. In the alternative, it has been  prayed that the increase in employee cost due to wage revision be allowed as per  actuals for extra cost to be incurred consequent to wage revision. We are not  expressing any view, as this issue does not arise for consideration at this stage. The  petitioner may approach for a relief in this regard at an appropriate stage in  accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
INTEREST ON WORKING CAPITAL <\/p>\n
35. The components of the working capital and the interest thereon are discussed  hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
(i) Maintenance spares  Regulation 56(v)(1)(b) of the 2004 regulations provides for maintenance  spares @ 1% of the historical cost escalated @ 6% per annum from the date of  commercial operation. In the present case, element-wise capital expenditure on  the date of commercial operation is Rs. 4117.70 lakh, which has been  considered as the historical cost for the purpose of the present petition and  maintenance spares haven worked out accordingly by escalating 1% of the  historical cost @ 6% per annum. In this manner, the value of maintenance  spares works out to Rs. 47.89 lakh as on 1.4.2004.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) O & M expenses Regulation 56(v)(1)(a) of the 2004 regulations provides for operation and  maintenance expenses for one month as a component of working capital. The  petitioner has claimed O&M expenses for 1 month of O&M expenses of the  respective year as claimed in the petition. This has been considered in the  working capital.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Receivables  As per Regulation 56(v)(1)(c) of the 2004 regulations, receivables will be  equivalent to two months average billing calculated on target availability level.  The petitioner has claimed the receivables on the basis 2 months’ transmission  charges claimed in the petition. In the tariff being allowed, receivables have  been worked out on the basis 2 months’ transmission charges.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) Rate of interest on working capital  As per Regulation 56(v)(2) of the 2004 regulations, rate of interest on  working capital shall be on normative basis and shall be equal to the short-term  Prime Lending Rate of State Bank of India as on 1.4.2004 or on 1st April of the  year in which the project or part thereof (as the case may be) is declared under  commercial operation, whichever is later. The interest on working capital is  payable on normative basis notwithstanding that the transmission licensee has  not taken working capital loan from any outside agency. The petitioner has  claimed interest on working capital @ 10.25% based on SBI PLR as on  1.4.2004, which is in accordance with the 2004 regulations and has been  allowed.\n<\/p>\n
36. The necessary computations in support of interest on working capital are  appended hereinbelow:\n<\/p>\n
                                                               (Rs. in lakh)
\n                          2004-05    2005-06    2006-07    2007-08     2008-09
\nMaintenance
\nSpares                     47.89      50.76      53.80      57.03       60.45
\nO & M expenses             14.07      14.63      15.22      15.81       16.46
\nReceivables               100.01      97.88     121.61     136.76      133.05
\nTotal                     161.96     163.27     190.64     209.61      209.97
\nRate of Interest           10.25%     10.25%     10.25%     10.25%      10.25%
\nInterest                   16.60      16.74      19.54      21.49       21.52 <\/p>\n
TRANSMISSION CHARGES <\/p>\n
37. The capital cost and other relevant details are contained in the summary sheet  attached. The transmission charges being allowed for transmission line are  summarised below:\n<\/p>\n
                                                          (Rs.in lakh)
\n                           2004-05     2005-06     2006-07     2007-08     2008-09
\nDepreciation                123.03      123.03      123.03      123.03      123.03
\nInterest on Loan            211.53      191.89      170.01      141.24      111.11
\nReturn on Equity             80.11       80.11       80.11       80.11       80.11
\nAdvance against Depreciation  0.00        0.00      154.29      264.97      264.97
\nInterest on Working Capital  16.60       16.74       19.54       21.49       21.52
\nO & M Expenses              168.78      175.53      182.69      189.76      197.57
\nTotal                       600.05      587.30      729.67      820.59      798.30 <\/p>\n
38. In addition to the transmission charges, the petitioner shall be entitled to other  charges like income-tax, incentive, surcharge and other cess and taxes in accordance  with the 2004 regulations. These transmission charges shall be included in the  regional transmission tariff for Northern Region and shall be shared by the regional  beneficiaries in accordance with the 2004 regulations. Impact of additional capitalization for the years 2001-04 <\/p>\n
39. In the petitions filed by NTPC for approval of revised fixed charges for  additional capitalization for the period 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2004, the Commission has  decided that additional capital expenditure be added to the gross block as on 1.4.2001  to arrive at gross block as on 1.4.2004 for the purpose of fixation of tariff for the period  2004-05 to 2008-09. The Commission has further ordered that NTPC would be  entitled to earn return on equity @ 16% on equity portion of additional capitalization  approved and interest on loan at the rate as applicable during 2001-02 to 2003-04.  The return on equity and interest on loan are payable on additional capitalization from  st April of the financial year following the financial year to which additional capital  expenditure relates.\n<\/p>\n
40. Based on the above, the petitioner shall be entitled to recover the following  amounts from the respondents through tariff on account of return on equity on  additional equity of Rs 176.04 lakh for the year 2002-03, which is the same as claimed  by the petitioner:\n<\/p>\n
                                                             (Rs. in lakh)
\nImpact of ACE                        2002-03           2003-04             Total
\nInterest on Loan                       0.00              0.00              0.00
\nReturn on Equity                       0.00             28.17             28.17
\nTotal                                  0.00             28.17             28.17 <\/p>\n
41. The petitioner has sought approval for the reimbursement of expenditure of Rs.  2,92,924\/- incurred on publication of notices in the newspapers. The petitioner shall  claim reimbursement of the said expenditure directly from the respondents in one  installment in the ratio applicable for sharing of transmission charges. The petitioner  has also sought reimbursement of filing fee of Rs.5 lakh paid. A final view on  reimbursement of filing fee is yet to be taken by the Commission for which views of  the stakeholder have been called for. The view taken on consideration of the  comments received shall apply in the present case as regards reimbursement of filing  fee.\n<\/p>\n
42. The petitioner is already billing the respondents on provisional basis in  accordance with the Commission’s interim directions. The provisional billing of tariff  shall be adjusted in the light of final tariff now approved by us.\n<\/p>\n
43. This order disposes of Petition No.35\/2005 as also the IA No.29\/2005.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006 Bench: B Bhushan, A Jung ORDER 1. The petition has been filed for approval for transmission charges for 220 kV D\/C Jallandhar-Hamirpur transmission line with associated bays in Northern Region (the transmission line) for the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nPower Grid Corporation Of India ... vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ... on 23 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Power Grid Corporation Of India ... vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ... on 23 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-01-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-04T03:44:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-01-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-04T03:44:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\"},\"wordCount\":3739,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\",\"name\":\"Power Grid Corporation Of India ... vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ... on 23 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-01-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-04T03:44:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Power Grid Corporation Of India ... vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ... on 23 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Power Grid Corporation Of India ... vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ... on 23 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-01-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-04T03:44:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006","datePublished":"2006-01-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-04T03:44:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006"},"wordCount":3739,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006","name":"Power Grid Corporation Of India ... vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran ... on 23 January, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-01-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-04T03:44:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/power-grid-corporation-of-india-vs-rajasthan-rajya-vidyut-prasaran-on-23-january-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Power Grid Corporation Of India … vs Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran … on 23 January, 2006"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49108"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49108\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}